On the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Teachers Self-efficacy in High School and University Contexts NASRIN SIYAMAKNIA 1, AMIR REZA NEMAT TABRIZI 2, MASOUD ZOGHI 3 ABSTRACT The current study attempts to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence and EFL instructors self-efficacy at the high school and university level. To this end, 102 instructors from local universities and high schools located in East and West Azarbaijan, Iran were selected as a sample of this research. In order to collect the necessary data, the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (the EQ-i) and Bandura s Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale were used. Results suggest that there is a significant relationship between teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy beliefs. The study concludes that it is necessary to both highlight the necessity of emotional intelligence and focus more attention on the role of it in EFL contexts. Key words: Emotional intelligence, self-efficacy, university instructors, EFL contexts. 1. M.A. Candidate in TEFL, Islamic Azad University, Ahar 2. Phd in PNU university, Tabriz 3. Phd in Islamic Azad University, Ahar 71 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
1. Introduction Emotional intelligence refers to one s ability to acknowledge and handle emotions in yourself and in others (Salovey&Mayer, 1990).Today, it is more critical than before for the academically prepared students to compete for knowledge and technology-based jobs. For the students who are not adequately prepared, the economic and social costs can be extremely high. Early withdrawal from secondary school, for example, has been linked with higher levels of unemployment, lower earnings, and increased health problems (Stough, saklofske, &Parker, p.239). Popular attention was drawn to the link between educational success and emotional and social competency by Golman in 1995, who suggested that emotional intelligence (EI) is more important than IQ in predicting success in life, including academic success (Stough, Saklofske& Parker, p.239). Efficacy beliefs influence how people think, feel, get motivated, and concern the issues of causality. Studies related to the effect of teachers' EI on teacher self-efficacy has not recorded well in the EI literature (to the knowledge of the present researcher) and despite the extensive literature investigating the various aspects of EI, studies that address the effects of EI strategies on self-efficacy are still rare and this area needs more treatment. Therefore, this line of work could shed more lights on bridging the gap in the EI and teacher self-efficacy. The present study, moreover, in the field of education could help teachers with a greater level of belief in themselves toward a specific domain, which could, in turn, affect student s achievement. In the Iranian EFL context English is formally taught to Iranian students in junior high school for three years, during high school for another three years, and during the pre-university level, for another year. This continues in the university context based on the students future needs; teachers role in the learners achievement is very significant. It s better to increase teachers self-efficacy and emotional intelligence to energize the ELT education and help the learners achieve their learning goals. Therefore, to obtain a clearer understanding of the relationship between these two variables, the study considers if there is any relationship between teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy and if there any difference between Iranian EFL teachers' emotional Intelligence and their self-efficacy in high school and in university contexts. The researcher attempted to examine the relationship between these two variables in the Iranian EFL context. Another reason prompting the researcher doing the study was the fact that most of the studies conducted in the EI domain are restricted to the L1 environment. Since EI and self-efficacy are main issues in all levels of education and since they directly affect EFL teaching, it seems that some research should be carried out in the EFL realm to examine if and how these two factors are related. The purpose of this research hence was to study the relationship between teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in the EFL context. 1.1. Emotional Intelligence The ability to monitor one s own feelings, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one s thinking and action (Salovey& Mayer, 1990). 1.2. Self-efficacy Bandura (1994) stated, Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives. (P.71) 72 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
A teacher's sense of efficacy has been found to be associated with student characteristics such as motivation achievement, and efficacy. Teacher efficacy is defined as the teacher's belief in his or her capability to organize and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context. The concept of emotional intelligence means you must have a self-awareness that enables you to recognize feelings and manage your emotion. (Bandura 1997, p. 243). 1.3. Research Questions Considering the problem stated above and the purpose of the study, the following research questions were formulated and investigated in this study: Q1: Is there any relationship between EFL teachers emotional intelligence and their sense of self-efficacy? Q2: Is there any difference between Iranian EFL teachers' emotional Intelligence and their self-efficacy in high school and in university contexts? HO1: There is no relationship between EFL teacher s EI and their sense of self-efficacy. HO2: There is no difference between EFL teachers' emotional intelligence and self efficacy in high school and in university contexts. 2. Background of the Study Since its inception in the early 1990s (Salovey, 1990), research on EI has made significant contributions to an understanding of how individuals differ in their affective processes and how those differences impact their social functioning (Ashkanasy&Daus, 2005; Cote & Miners, 2006) Reviewing the EI literature reveals various areas researched: ability- and trait-based EI (Daus&Ashkanasy, 2005; Petrides, Furnham, &Mavroveli, 2007), the ability of EI approach to utilize maximum-performance tests in order to quantify one s emotional capability (Mayer &Salovey, 1993), and developing tests similar to IQ tests (Daus&Ashkanasy, 2005).On the other hand, trait EI is viewed as a person s predisposition (Petrides, Frederickson, &Furnham, 2004) and is typically measured via self-reports. Within this broad EI framework, various theorists have tested divergent models and self-report measures such as WLEIS (Wong and Law s EI Survey; Wong & Law, 2002), SREIS (Self-Report EI Scale; Brackett, Rivers, Lerner, Salovey, &Shiffman, 2006). Bandura (1977) contends that a person s self-perceptions of emotional abilities should be viewed as a specific form of self-efficacy, called emotional self-efficacy (ESE). Conceptualizing EI in the light of self-efficacy is important because it theoretically explains why people behave sub-optimally even though they know what is emotionally correct in social situations (Bandura, 1977). Studies in self-efficacy have shown what a person does is an integrative orchestration of his/her cognitive, social, and affective skills, rather than what the person is simply able to do. A person is capable as much as he/she perceives him/herself to be, and these judgmental capabilities play a mediating role between ability and action (Bandura, 1977). Recently, the two meta-analyses regarding EI (O Boyle, Humphrey, Polack, Hawver, & Story, 2011) indicated that ability EI has a consistent but only weak direct effect on individual performance. They, furthermore, argued that ESE facilitates this bridging role between individuals ability and performance in the realm of emotions. They finally contended that the conception of ESE can address the issue of empirical scant findings of ability EI. 73 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
3. Methodology The participants of this study included 102 teachers in high schools and universities. A total of 120teachers (52university teachers and 50high school teachers) were recruited to the study. They were mostly from Islamic Azad university of Tabriz, Tabriz DaneshvaranUniversity, Tabriz Payam Noor University, and Tabriz HazratRoghaye high school, Nazlu University and Laaya high school in Urumia, Azad university of Ahar, Zeynabieh high school in Bostan Abad, ShahidBeheshti and Doctor Shariati high schools in Ardebil as representatives of Iranian Teachers in the study. The participants were randomly selected from high schools and universities. Moreover, the teachers enjoyed higher academic degrees in English Translation, Literature of English Language, or TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language). The research was conducted using self-report instruments. The objectives of the current research were to assess the relationship between teacher s emotional intelligence and their self- efficacy. To achieve this goal, there are a number of instruments were employed to determine this relationship. The instruments employed in the present study were Bar-On Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EQ-i)(Bar-On, 1997) and Bandura teacher self-efficacy scale.(eq-i) Survey Questions Bar-On EQ- I is comprised of 133 questions. For each question there are five possible responses: 1. Very seldom or not true of me, 2. Seldom true of me, 3. Sometimes true of me, 4. Often true of me, and 5. Very often true of me or true of me. To facilitate accountability the participants can select from 1 to 5 as the possible answer and Bandura teacher s self-efficacy scale questionnaire designed to estimate the effectiveness of teachers in the classroom is composed of 30 classified statements in 9 items. 3.1. Design The present study enjoys an Ex post Facto Design. The reason is that, based on Hatch and Lazaraton (1991), there is no treatment involved in the study, nor is the study concerned with the learning process the participants might have gone through as a significant factor. No control is implemented over the effect of variables of the study (emotional intelligence and EFL instructors self-efficacy) on each other. None of the variables of the study are manipulated to cause changes, either. What is of paramount importance then is the type and strength of the connection between variables of the study; therefore an Ex Post Facto Design is the appropriate design for the accomplishment of the purpose of the study (Field, 2009). In order to examine the validity and reliability of the questionnaires, a pilot study was conducted. The questionnaires were administrated to a group of 10 teachers who were very similar to the target population for whom the instrument was designed. The Cronbach-alpha coefficient value for the overall reliability analysis of the questionnaire was found at.879 which showed a satisfying level of reliability (See table 4.1 below). Table 4.1. Reliability Statistics of EI Questionnaire Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items.878.879 133 74 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
Also, the Cronbach-alpha coefficient value for the overall reliability analysis of the questionnaire was found at.756which represented a satisfying level of reliability (See table 4.2 below). Table 4.2. Reliability Statistics of Efficacy Questionnaire Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items.756.756 30 In order to investigate the relationship between teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy, a Pearson correlation coefficient was conducted. Also, in order to examine the differences between high school and university teachers regarding their EI and self-efficacy, T-test was conducted. The results are shown below: Research Question 1: Is there any relationship between EFL teachers EI and their sense of self-efficacy? To find an answer to the first question of the study, a Pearson correlation coefficient was employed. Results are presented in tables 4.3 and 4.4 below. Table 4.5 shows the descriptive statistics including means and standard deviations of the teachers with regard to their emotional intelligence and self-efficacy. Table 4.3.Descriptive Statistics of Teachers Emotional Intelligence and Self-efficacy Mean Std. Deviation N Emotional intelligence 1.81442 14.35273 102 Self-efficacy 1.77502 13.91518 102 Table 4.4.The Relationship between Teachers Emotional Intelligence and Self-efficacy Emotional intelligence Selfefficacy Emotional intelligence Pearson Correlation 1.694 ** Sig. (2-tailed).000 N 102 102 Self-efficacy Pearson Correlation.694 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed).000 N 102 102 75 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
The results of table 4.4 indicate that there is a strong, positive, and significant correlation (r= 0.694, p< 0.01) between the emotional intelligence and self-efficacy of teachers. Therefore the first null hypothesis as there is not any significant relationship between EFL teachers EI and their sense of self-efficacy is rejected. Research Question No. 2: Is there any difference between Iranian EFL teachers emotional intelligence in high school and in university contexts? The process of data analysis for the second research question began with computing the descriptive statistics of teachers in different levels of teaching on their emotional intelligence. Table 4.5 shows the results. Table 4.5. Descriptive Statistics of Teachers Emotional Intelligence across Level of Teaching Teaching N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error level Mean Emotional intelligence high school 20 4.11802 26.83988 6.00158 university 82 3.44432 73.47848 8.11434 As the mean and standard deviation scores, there are differences between high school and university teachers with respect to their level of emotional intelligence. However, in order to get more accurate and reliable results, an Independent samples T-test was run the results of which are displayed in table 4.6. Table 4.6. Independent Samples T-test Results for Teachers Emotional Intelligence across Level of Teaching Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances F Sig. t df Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval of the Lower Upper Emotional Equal 22.126.000 4.023 100.000 67.37317 16.74838 3.414491 1.006012 intelligence variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 6.675 8.5181.000 67.37317 10.09264 4.730691 8.743941 The results show that the significance level of Levene's test is p = 0.000, which means that the variances for the two groups (high school and university) are not the same. The results of Independent samples T-test show statistically significant differences (t (6.675) = 0.000, p < 0.05) between the teachers with regard to their teaching level. The descriptive statistics, point to the same finding showing that high school teachers (M= 4.11, SD= 26.83) outperform university teachers (M= 3.44, SD= 73.47) with respect to the level of emotional intelligence, too. Is there any difference between Iranian EFL teachers sense of self-efficacy in high school and in university contexts? The descriptive statistics for the differences between high school and university teachers with regard to their selfefficacy and EI are reported before. 76 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
Selfefficacy Table 4.7. Descriptive Statistics of Teachers Self-efficacy across Level of Teaching Teaching N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean high school 20 1.52802 33.99783 7.60215 University 82 1.83522 15.95768 1.76223 As table 4.7 exhibits, the mean of university level teachers (M= 1.83, SD= 15.95) is higher than that of high school level teachers (M= 1.52, SD= 33.99) considering their level of self-efficacy. Below are the results of Independent samples T-test for the self-efficacy differences of high school and university level teachers. Self-efficacy Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed Table 4.8. Independent Samples T-test Results for Teachers Self-efficacy across Level of Teaching Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means Equality of Variances F Sig. t Df Sig. (2- tailed) Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval of the Lower Upper 1.0661.002-5.970 100.000-30.72439 5.14660-4.093511-2.051371-3.937 2.1081.001-30.72439 7.80372-4.694931-1.449951 The results show that the significance level of Levene's test is p = 0.002, which means that the variances for the two groups (high school and university) are not the same. The results of the second part of the second research question, therefore, are in line with those of the first part of second research question since statistically significant (t (-3.937) = 0.001, p< 0.05) differences are found among high school and university teachers with regard to their sense of self-efficacy. The results of descriptive statistics show that university teachers (M= 1.83, SD= 15.95) have a higher level of self-efficacy compared to the high school teachers (M= 1.52, SD= 33.99). 5. Conclusion The findings of the study indicated that there is a strong, positive, and significant correlation between the emotional intelligence and self-efficacy of teachers. The results of the current study lead to the conclusion that enhancing teachers EI tends to have a positive influence on their sense of efficacy. This in turn may lead to effective teaching and accordingly to successful student achievement since a strong sense of teacher efficacy has been found to be associated with teachers pedagogical success (Moafian & Ghanizadeh, 2009) and student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 2001). Previous studies have also pointed to the role of teacher efficacy in shaping students attitudes toward school and subject matter, i.e., the higher the teaching efficacy of a teacher, the greater the students interest in school and learning materials 77 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
(Tschannen- Moran et al., 1998). In light of the obtained results and by considering Bar-on s views(2000), we can justify exploiting and developing courses for EFL teachers focusing on skills associated with EI. These courses are expected to help teachers manipulate their emotions appropriately, shift undesirable emotional states to more productive ones, understand the link between emotions, thoughts and actions, attract and sustain rewarding interpersonal relationships in the classroom, and be sensitive to students emotions. This is in line with the researches done on the relationship between Iranian teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in language institutes (Moafian&Ghanizadeh2009) and also consistent with previous theoretical and empirical studies, though limited in the domain of L1 context, and quite spare in L2 context. Bandura (1997) discussed that somatic information conveyed by physiological and emotional states gives rise to efficacy beliefs (p. 106). To the researchers best knowledge, the present study maybe the first attempt to explore the relationship between EFL teachers EQ and their self-efficacy in high school and university contexts. Thus, this study should be replicated to find out whether similar results can be obtained elsewhere. Finally, a moderate, strong and direct relationship was found between the EI and efficacy of university teachers which signifies that High levels of emotional intelligence are very direct impact on teacher performance in the classroom, and ultimately the success of students. References Bandura, A., 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman, New York, NY. Cote.S. (2006).Emotional Intelligence cognitive Intelligence and job performance.administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 1-28. Daus.C, A. N. (2005). The Case for the Ability Based Model of Emotional Intelligence in Organizational Behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 453-466. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Limited. Goleman, D., 1995. Emotional Intelligence. Bantam, New York. Mayer, J.D., & Salovey, p. (1997). The intelligence of emotional intelligence. Intelligence,17,433-442. Moafian, F., &Ghanizadeh, A. (2009).The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes. System, 37(4), 708-718.Mortiboys.A. (2005). Teaching with Emotional Intelligence: ROUTLEDGE. Petrides, K. V., Frederickson, N., &Furnham, A. (2004).The role of trait emotional intelligence in academic performance and deviant behavior at school.personality and individual differences, 36(2), 277-293. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J.D. (1990). Emotional intelligence.imagination,cognition, and Personality,9, 185 211 Salovey, P., & Mayer, J.D. (1990). Emotional intelligence.imagination,cognition, and Personality,9, 185 211 78 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)
Stough, C., Saklofske, D. H., & Parker, J. D. A. (Eds.). (2009). Assessing emotional intelligence: Theory, research, and applications.ny: Springer. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805. Wong, C. S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3), 243-274. 79 ELT Voices India International Journal ISSN 2230-9136 (Print) 2321-7170 (Online)